[Skykomish]

A 65-year-old Spokane man has been ordered held in custody on federal charges of illegally possessing automatic weapons and illegally storing explosives in a Bellevue commercial storage shed while agents investigate how he came to possess a huge military-grade arsenal that included grenade launchers, machine guns and plastic explosives.

By Mike Carter

Seattle Times staff reporter

A 65-year-old Spokane man has been ordered held in custody on federal charges of illegally possessing automatic weapons and illegally storing explosives in a Bellevue commercial storage shed while agents investigate how he came to possess a huge military-grade arsenal that included grenade launchers, machine guns and plastic explosives.

Ronald Struve, heavyset and bearded, appeared in Seattle before U.S. Magistrate Judge Mary Alice Theiler on Tuesday after being extradited from Spokane, where he was arrested Jan. 7 during a raid by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF).

In four searches in Bellevue and Spokane, agents seized 37 machine guns, 12 silencers, two grenade launchers, more than 60 high-explosive grenades, several pounds of military-grade C-4 plastic explosives and thousands of rounds of ammunition.

Most of this material was stored in commercial sheds near businesses and homes, said Assistant U. S. Attorney Thomas Woods.

At a detention hearing set for Friday, Woods said he will present evidence that Struve possessed "anti-government material."

According to a complaint filed earlier this month, Struve "planned to use the items at some uncertain date in the future."

Two law-enforcement sources familiar with the case, but who spoke on condition of anonymity, used the term "Armageddon" to describe what Struve was apparently awaiting in stockpiling the weapons.

Agents have served four search warrants — three in Spokane and another in Lynnwood.

The Lynnwood shed was empty; however, agents recovered eight machine guns and additional grenade rounds in a search on a storage shed in Spokane.

The search of the Bellevue storage shed did not require a warrant because agents were given permission by a man who purchased the contents at an auction.

ATF Special Agent Heidi Wallace said much of the recovered ordnance was almost certainly stolen from the military because there is no other place to get it.

Woods said the investigation is continuing and that a grand-jury indictment is possible. So far, agents have questioned at least two others — including a man who rented the shed in Bellevue. No other arrests have been made.

Wallace, who was at Struve's court hearing Tuesday, said there was no evidence at this point that Struve was involved in domestic terrorism.

Struve first came to the ATF's attention in November, when the man who had purchased the shed's contents contacted the agency after he found it full of boxes of firearms, shells and other military-style hardware and wanted to know if the weapons were legal to keep.

The bureau sent Wallace to the buyer's garage, where he had stacked the contents from the storage unit. What Wallace found were "many boxes, plastic bins and ammunition containers."

The first box contained what appeared to be several machine guns. Likewise, the second box contained military-type firearms. In the third box, Wallace found "two grenades and other possible explosives."

Other agents were called, and what they found was startling — and worrisome.

"In all my years, I've never seen this sort of firepower in one place," said ATF Special Agent Nick Starcevic, the Seattle office's senior operations officer.

One box contained 54 M406 high-explosive grenade rounds — 40-millimeter shells that can be launched from a shoulder-fired weapon to distances of 300 yards or more, according to military specification.

Its explosion creates a "kill radius" of up to 16 feet from the point of impact and injuries dozens of yards beyond that.

Agents also found several other anti-personnel grenades, including a Korean War-era "Chicom" stick grenade.

In another box, agents found six blocks of C-4 plastic explosives.

Agents counted 32 apparent machine guns, including M-14s, M-16s, and several "Sten guns," a mass-produced submachine gun known for its high rate of fire — upward of 500 rounds per minute.

They also found nine silencers and the parts for several others, as well as thousands of rounds of ammunition and various other military hardware.

"All of the military explosive items seized are considered contraband and cannot be possessed by anyone other than the military," Wallace wrote in a search warrant. "The majority of the items seized appeared to be stolen military explosive materials."

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008651920_weapons21m0.html

[Skykomish]

What is "Anti-Government Material" ???:what::banghead::cuss:

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

What is "Anti-Government Material" ???

http://lawlibnews.blog.asu.edu/files/2007/09/constitution_quill_pen.jpg

[Duke of Doubt]

Oh, come on. Isn't anyone going to pipe up and say, "'Arsenal'? You call that an 'arsenal'? Sheesh; what would they say if they saw MY gun room?"?

[GE-Mini-Gun]

...37 machine guns, 12 silencers, two grenade launchers, more than 60 high-explosive grenades, several pounds of military-grade C-4 plastic explosives and thousands of rounds of ammunition.

Every one of these items is legal to own, you have to pay for the stamp but they’re legal. With that said I have no idea if this guy had the stamps, but…

[Titan6]

"In all my years, I've never seen this sort of firepower in one place," said ATF Special Agent Nick Starcevic, the Seattle office's senior operations officer.

One wonders what is in the ATF's arms room if this guy impressed him that much. That would not even fill a tiny arms room in the Army.

"All of the military explosive items seized are considered contraband and cannot be possessed by anyone other than the military," Wallace wrote in a search warrant. "The majority of the items seized appeared to be stolen military explosive materials."

While I find it amusing that the English language continues to be tortured by confused agents ("can not legally be" maybe he meant to say) I abhor the lying as he well knows that machine guns are perfectly legal with the tax stamp and many grenade launchers don't require one or anything special at all.

thousands of rounds of ammunition

Clearly he was NOT much of a shooter.

Struve first came to the ATF's attention in November, when the man who had purchased the shed's contents contacted the agency after he found it full of boxes of firearms, shells and other military-style hardware and wanted to know if the weapons were legal to keep.

I say Kudos to this man for contacting the ATF. I doubt that many here would do the same. In fact I think quite a lot of people here would keep the stuff and move it to a dark hole somewhere. Even I would be sorely tempted. But honestly it is not worth going to prison over.

The part that I don't understand is why he didn't pay his bill? If had all that stuff he could have sold it and raised the cash easily. I am sure there is more to it but this how criminals get caught all the time by doing something stupid.

[Mello]

Anyone wonder why the 65 year old guy who stored that stuff did not pay his rent of that storage space?

[Maelstrom]

With all the times I've seen a 500 round brick of .22s referred to as an arsenal it's almost refreshing to see the media finally found one.

[Funderb]

so much for a shed full of fun.

[General Geoff]

Did this man ever hurt anyone?

[Titan6]

Did this man ever hurt anyone?

It seems pretty unlikely. I have not heard much about grenade launchers and captured full auto weapons in the Pacific North West. The issue is not who he hurt the issue is if he did indeed possess all those weapons he broke a number of laws.

[Duke of Doubt]

Yeah, I've got a grenade launcher on the end of my M59/66.

Storage units are a risky proposition. It's not like a bank safe deposit box. Rent checks get lost or misapplied, notices to the lessor get missed or disregarded as junk mail or something they've already taken care of, and suddenly all their stuff is gone. It's best to deal personally with the owner, and provide multiple contact persons you can trust in the event an illness, detention, disappearance or death makes it impossible for you to retrieve your possessions.

[Cmdr. Gravez0r]

At a detention hearing set for Friday, Woods said he will present evidence that Struve possessed "anti-government material."


Probably something along the lines of EFAD or Boston's books, or maybe the AC.

[PTK]

For every cache found, how many sit harmlessly for decades "just in case"?

[Cmdr. Gravez0r]

For every cache found, how many sit harmlessly for decades "just in case"?

That thought brings a smile to my face.

:)

[General Geoff]

The issue is not who he hurt the issue is if he did indeed possess all those weapons he broke a number of laws.

Shouldn't be an issue at all. He didn't hurt anyone.

[divemedic]

Why can't I stumble on an auction like that?

[natecade1]

I think the media needs to broaden their vocabulary seeing as how two rifles and a pistol is also an arsenal or weapons cache.

[Duke of Doubt]

Years ago, rumors persisted in the area of a sort of "NFA Tontine Club." The story was that a group of Francos went away to WWII and somehow either brought back or sent back at least a few NFA weapons each. Members of the Club were sworn to secrecy, and each dying member passed his weapons to the remaining survivors with the understanding that the last member, then probably advanced in age, could sell them illegally and live out his remaining years in comfort. Only it didn't work out that way. According to the story, the second to last member died either on an ice fishing expedition or in an attempt to visit the cache, rumored to exist in a cave in the western mountains, and the last ailing member died shortly thereafter without revealing the cache location. So somewhere around here there is a cave full of NFA weapons, if you believe in the bedtime stories.

[frankd4]

Lern to bury stuff in PVC pipe best if it's in some one elses property.

[Eightball]

ATF Special Agent Heidi Wallace said much of the recovered ordnance was almost certainly stolen from the military because there is no other place to get it.I presume the ATF is completely and totally ignorant of *gasp!* the BLACK MARKET?

Geez.

Maybe the guy was just waiting for some kind of ATF "Amnesty" thing, maybe he just forgot/didn't know to register everything, and got screwed.

[Duke of Doubt]

Well, Fort Lewis isn't far from Spokane. Military arms have been stolen before.

But I have a sneaking hunch they will be found to have been diverted or stolen from shipments, not directly from the Army.

[Kind of Blued]

If I had my druthers, assuming this guy didn't steal everything, that guy would be guilty of nothing but "lacking a quality bolt-action, over-under 12 gauge, etc".

He'd have a good start on a collection though.

[deadin]

Every one of these items is legal to own, you have to pay for the stamp but they’re legal.

Not in Washington State. Machine guns are a no-no even with a stamp.
Sliencers with papers are OK as long as you don't put them on a gun.

[PTK]

ATF Special Agent Heidi Wallace said much of the recovered ordnance was almost certainly stolen from the military because there is no other place to get it.
I presume the ATF is completely and totally ignorant of *gasp!* the BLACK MARKET?

M433 HEDP rounds aren't made for anyone BUT the military, and if he had grenade launchers and HEDP grenades, they were military by simple process of elimination.


Still doesn't hurt my feelings. People pay for these with tax money anyway.

[Gryffydd]

Sliencers with papers are OK as long as you don't put them on a gun.
Actually, I believe you're OK to even put them on a gun...just so long as you never fire it with it on :rolleyes:

[expvideo]

Every one of these items is legal to own, you have to pay for the stamp but they’re legal. With that said I have no idea if this guy had the stamps, but…
Machineguns are outlawed under Washington state law, unless you are an on-duty police officer.

Silencers are legal to own and to attach to firearms, but they are illegal to fire bullets through. This has never been challenged in court, and every case that has ever resulted in an arrest was thrown out. There is no exception for law enforcement, yet many Washington State police departments use them, even at public ranges. The state doesn't want to open that can of worms, which is why they haven't pursued charges against anyone yet. That being said, I wouldn't want to be the test case.

As for explosives and grenade launchers, I don't know how regulated, if at all, they are by WA law. It is highly unlikely that they were obtained legally.

[RP88]

still wondering how they assumed the pretense of his plan for 'armageddon'. You'd think he would have made a road trip to DC over the weekend if he was truly planning something.

[zminer]

still wondering how they assumed the pretense of his plan for 'armageddon'

Keep in mind this quote was attributed to unnamed law enforcement sources. It could have been an offhand quote from anyone, or even something someone said as a joke that the reporter felt sounded good in the story. Or, who knows, maybe it's something associated with the anti-government material they found. It really isn't clear.

That said, it sounds like law enforcement did the right thing. If machine guns are illegal and he owned them ... well, then he was doing something illegal and deserved to be arrested for it. Doesn't matter what he intended to do with them (unless they can prove it was for nefarious purposes) - he broke the law. It's pretty simple, really.

Plus if he *was* stealing stuff from the military - or someone else was stealing it and selling/giving it to him - I'd be pretty mad about that. I'd kind of rather that the military equipment my tax dollars pays for stays on military bases until it's needed, and doesn't get diverted to sheds somewhere for random dudes to stare at.

[expvideo]

I can't believe that some of you guys are siding with him on this one. That is just nuts.

[divemedic]

I can't believe that some of you guys are siding with him on this one. That is just nuts.

When assault weapons are banned next year, and a man is caught with some, where will your sympathies lie?

[expvideo]

When assault weapons are banned next year, and a man is caught with some, where will your sympathies lie?
This guy either stole illegal machine guns and explosives from the government, or he bought ones that were stolen in an illegal purchase. This is not someone who has been taken advantage of by law enforcement. This is a bad guy. I don't care how old he is.

He didn't have unbanned assault weapons. He had machine guns, grenade launchers and c4. I don't think they should be illegal either, but they are.

Tell me why you think I should sympathize with a criminal.

[ilbob]

Forgetting for the moment that much of the material is illegal for us mere citizens to own, he was in possession of lots of stolen property.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

Stolen property is stolen property regardless of how you feel about the NFA.

[Titan6]

This guy either stole illegal machine guns and explosives from the government, or he bought ones that were stolen in an illegal purchase. This is not someone who has been taken advantage of by law enforcement. This is a bad guy. I don't care how old he is.

Forgetting for the moment that much of the material is illegal for us mere citizens to own, he was in possession of lots of stolen property.

Maybe, maybe not. Don't forget nobody knows how many unregistered machine guns there are wandering around in private hands that did not get on the registry. The ATF did not say that the guns were stolen, merely that they believed that they were stolen. How hard is it to run a trace back to the manufacturer for the serial number for the ATF? One would think not that hard. If the guns were sold to the military or police that would show.

[expvideo]

It is the people who side with this guy who are losing us the battle against the antis. You guys make us all look crazy.

[Titan6]

It is the people who side with this guy who are losing us the battle against the antis. You guys make us all look crazy.

Crazy is as crazy does. This is not so much a question of taking sides but not condemning someone until all the facts are in. Certainly with all the other lies and bad information put out in that press release that alone would be enough reasonable doubt to drive a truck through.

If you are willing to accept everything the media prints at face value than you are the one who is leading us down the path to absolute failure and enslavement.

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

Maybe, maybe not. Don't forget nobody knows how many unregistered machine guns there are wandering around in private hands that did not get on the registry. The ATF did not say that the guns were stolen, merely that they believed that they were stolen. How hard is it to run a trace back to the manufacturer for the serial number for the ATF? One would think not that hard. If the guns were sold to the military or police that would show. Except the guy didn't have just guns. He had grenades that are only manufactured and sold to military, hence the only way he could have gotten them is if they were stolen.

[Quiet]

Every one of these items is legal to own, you have to pay for the stamp but they’re legal. With that said I have no idea if this guy had the stamps, but…

Except in WA.

Civilian possession of machineguns and destructive devices are prohibited in WA.

Only NFA firearms you can own in WA are any-other weapons and noise suppressors.
However, you can not legally install a noise suppressor onto a firearm in WA (you can own them, but can't use them).

[JImbothefiveth]

Plus if he *was* stealing stuff from the military - or someone else was stealing it and selling/giving it to him - I'd be pretty mad about that.
+1, I pay enough taxes already.

[Zoogster]

When there is no legal sources the source will be illegal. Whether they are stolen or smuggled from "corrupt" sources, or stolen by another party.

Personaly I think the story is rather fair. The guy commited crimes by mere possession, but they acknowledge he merely owned them for "armageddon".
That is essentialy saying he was just harmlessly stockpiling them just in case, and had no intention of harming anyone short of a major SHTF scenario.

Sure beats them exagerating he was some terrorist intent on major harm when he wasn't.


The analogy to banned "Assault weapons" is accurate though. Such items were once legal, and then they were outlawed. Enough time and generations passed that now such things being outlawed seems like "common sense".
After 10 years of the AWB it seemed like "common sense" to many as well, and exceedingly dangerous to let it lapse.

In 1968 people were limited to .50 and less bore diameter, FFLs become required for the first time, and prohibited persons came to pass.
"Destructive devices" like the grenade launcher came to exist.
Now it is "common sense" that such restrictions exist, yet they didn't for most of our nation's history.

The government and paramilitary "police" that will be used against the people if necessary can possess many things that are illegal for the average citizen. A double standard inconsistant with the intention of the 2nd.


"Anti government" material could mean anything. Just believing the government could be the bad guys during a SHTF situation (like during Katrina) would be "anti government".
A person could have a whole library of books, but in such a situation they will take those suitable to the prosecution in the collection out of context by only mentioning and displaying those alongside the weapons. It is all about creating an image, whether it is true or not.
I know many people with books on things they don't believe. It is after all thier first Amendment right. How many non-Communists have a copy of the Communist Manifesto? I think I have a Koran somewhere, though I am not a Muslim. I guess that means if found with an "arsenal" (of legal items) I could be labeled a "muslim extremist."

A person with stockpiles to get through something like Katrina, or the "big one" predicted to hit, or even a lengthy blizzard who also happens to own firearms would be considered an "extremist, survivalist," etc Being able to be self reliant for any length of time makes someone abnormal.
Combine that with a large number of firearms, especialy any illegal and they become assumed or reported as a total unstable wacko just by association, and people readily believe it.

I choose not to break the current law (many genocide policies were "the law" or supported by "the law" too) myself, but I have a hard time condemning others who choose to excercise the 2nd as was legal less than 50 years ago.
Of course he didn't "legaly" buy them at the corner store or through a mail order catalog, that was made illegal in 1968.

would NEVER give up anyone or any gun willingly to the fascists who run the ATF. that is like telling nazis where jews are hiding. it's anti constitutional and wrong to report someone who is not hurting anyone and exercising his constitutional rights. I agree. I may choose not to be involved in the illegal activity myself, but I certainly won't be an active participant in enforcing anti 2nd Amendment policies.
I guess that makes me like the German not quite willing to stand up and hide the Jews myself because I am "law abiding" and unwilling to put myself and family at risk, but not willing to tell on others for doing so.
Of course what is that qoute?
All that is needed for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing.
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."

Sounds like this man is an "unpitied sacrifice" to me.

[Titan6]

Except the guy didn't have just guns. He had grenades that are only manufactured and sold to military, hence the only way he could have gotten them is if they were stolen.

Again these are several assumptions on your part. That they were:
1. Grenades
2. Manufactured and sold to the military
3. Stolen

Not saying that it didn't happen that way. Not saying that the ATF isn't a great bastion of truth. Just saying you can't really tell all of that from the article.

[smee781]

I'll pee my pants if it all turned out to be air soft stuff!:what::eek::D

[NeoSpud]

Again these are several assumptions on your part. That they were:
1. Grenades
2. Manufactured and sold to the military
3. Stolen

Seriously? :scrutiny:

He had over four dozen of these:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m406.htm

Not exactly something you can pick up at your local Wal*Mart.
---
well, you can get an INERT one on GunBroker... if you don't mind the $850 +s/h price tag :D
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=121037474

[Hoplophile]

While I usually side with a fellow gun nut, let's not forget that it seems likely that this guy was taking guns out of the hands of our soldiers.

IF he didn't steal them, IF they were never stolen in the first place (maybe he somehow ordered them, I don't know), THEN I don't have an ethical issue with it. However, he had quite a bit of explosives. His intentions seemed to be good (just in case, like we can't empathize), but still, that many explosions? One ND into the wrong corner of that shed and you can say goodbye to anyone else in the area.

Plus, it would destroy all those beautiful machine guns.

He endangered his GUNS, people! Won't someone please think of the firearms?!?!

Anyway, he broke laws. He probably had stolen property. I don't sympathize, even though NFA sucks.

[TeamPrecisionIT]

That would be hilarious if its all airsoft!, lol. I didn't even think of that til you mentioned it.

Damian

[sturmgewehr667]

He endangered his GUNS, people! Won't someone please think of the firearms?!?!

won't someone please think of how siding with the fascist ATF is destroying our rights?

guns are much easier to replace than constitutional rights

[Titan6]

well, you can get an INERT one on GunBroker... if you don't mind the $850 +s/h price tag
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/Vie...Item=121037474

I have seen them a lot cheaper than $850.

That is not my only point but you are headed the right way. It is the same with all the "condemn the police and organize a swing party" for them based on half cocked witness report that are so popular around here. If you don't know, you don't know.

[average_shooter]

Some folks seem to be working on the assumption that everything in the article is true. This notion is always being proven false here on THR.

Let's keep in mind that the media can't tell the difference between live and inert munitions and the ATF can't tell between shoestrings and machine guns.

Knowing this you choose to believe the article is completely factual? Or at all factual? :scrutiny:

I think this is definitely one I've got to reserve judgment on.

[GlowinPontiac]

How much you want to bet some of those grenade launchers were the cup type ones that mount on the end of a rifle.

[expvideo]

Except in WA.

Civilian possession of machineguns and destructive devices are prohibited in WA.

Only NFA firearms you can own in WA are any-other weapons and noise suppressors.
However, you can not legally install a noise suppressor onto a firearm in WA (you can own them, but can't use them).
Again, it is not illegal to attach a suppressor. It is only illegal to shoot through a suppressor. The wording of the law says that it is illegal to use a device or contrivance to muffle the report of a firearm. That means that you can't shoot bullets through it., Attaching it isn't muffling anything. If it was illegal to attach it, the law would say that it is illegal to use any device capable of muffling the report of a firearm. If it was worded like that, then "use" could be interpretted to mean "attach". But since you have to "use" it "to muffle the report", that means that it is only illegal if you suppress the noise of a gunshot (AKA, fire a bullet through it).

If you don't believe me, please call Discount Gun Sales (one of the leading retailers of suppressors in the Puget Sound area) at 206-417-1625. They will tell you the same thing. You can buy, own and even attach a suppressor, but firing rounds through it is illegal. That is all that is illegal.

[Dr. Fresh]

I love how they think 500 rounds per minute is a "high rate of fire." That's pretty low for a full-auto.

Also, doesn't the Sten gun fire at more like 900 rpm?

[Treo]

I can't believe that some of you guys are siding with him on this one. That is just nuts.

I guess I'm just a nut then. In the words of Texas State Legislator Suzanna Gratia Hupp ( who is totally hot BTW) the purpose of the second amendment isn't to protect us from bad guys it's to protect us from the Government.

[woodfiend]

Shouldn't be an issue at all. He didn't hurt anyone.


Umm. How would you feel if your next door neighbor had 60 grenades, 6 blocks of C4, and 37 machine guns? The machine guns were a little alarming to me, but WHO IN THE WORLD needs high explosives of that design? Come on! What the heck would you do with that? I think we need to start trusting our big brother and accept that he could have been a terrorist.

[Bullnettles]

I dunno about you, but do you realized how easy cutting timber would be with that much C4? I forget the word for it, but I would be willing to bet you could take down 1000 trees in a click of a button :D. As for the guy, yes he broke the law, but some of you are seeing the law as the end-all. Laws are sometimes wrong and ever-changing. The only part I see wrong with the whole thing is that these were potentially stolen, which does bug me. The rest of it in competent hands is no more harmful than gasoline. Yes, it can be very bad if in the wrong hands, but if people use them responsibly, like gas is everyday, what's the big deal. OKC wasn't done with C4. If bad people want to do something, sadly they will find a way.

[RedAlert]

Let's not forget that any responsible person will not make public statements until they are assured that they are in full possession of all the facts.

The newspaper article, I'm sure is based on first observations, and perhaps by persons who are not experts. I suspect that is the reason that the agent made statements that are in the vein of "Looks like" "Appears to be" etc so they don't serve as fuel for the court system.

That is why the statement seem so "wishy washy" to us.

I do agree, that there is no personal reason a member of the general public needs grenades nor C4 explosives. I'm know there are rational needs for professionals to have such components, but we expect them to be in magazines in protected training compounds; not your local storage shed.

What if, kids or thieves broke in and stole the items. For sure if they died during the use of them I'd not cry. But, I'd sure feel sorry for innocent people who became "Collateral Damage."

For these reasons we have laws of usage, ownership, and possession.

[Zoogster]

The machine guns were a little alarming to me, but WHO IN THE WORLD needs high explosives of that design? Come on! What the heck would you do with that? I think we need to start trusting our big brother and accept that he could have been a terrorist.
Even the article does not reach that conclusion and they like to sensationalize things for publicity, and those seeking prosecutions (like the ATF spokeperson is working towards) like to sensationalize for convictions.
Yet even the conclusion they reach is it was some 65 year old man merely stockpiling illegal weapons for a SHTF scenario, which they refer to as "Armageddon".

So it most likely was not someone intent on causing harm.


As for why someone picturing a SHTF scenario would have such things:
You really think average small arms are going to do much to tanks or armored vehicles? Even the explosives themselves would not be very harmful unless used to create shaped charges.
However distribution of information about construction of something someone might use for any illegal purpose is a violation of the Feinstein Amendment created by Diane FeinStein in 1997 (the staunch anti-gunner also responsible for a lot of other bills like the AWB, the same one who sat beside Obama and organized his inauguration.) So one cannot really go into any detail there (what is the First Amendment?).
The insurgents in Iraq though have had a lot more success with IEDs and RPGs (which have numerous different warhead types, some much more effective) against modern forces than engaging with rifles. It is not a far stretch to assume similar requirments would exist in some SHTF scenarios.

[DRYHUMOR]

You just never know what might turn up at those storage shed auctions... :rolleyes:

I think I'll start going to them. :D

[ConstitutionCowboy]

The only problem I see here is if he stole that stuff.

Woody

[Treo]

Umm. How would you feel if your next door neighbor had 60 grenades, 6 blocks of C4, and 37 machine guns

Jealous :D

[woodfiend]

Okay, yeah he was going to blow down 1000 trees simultaneously. Except that he had silencers, machine guns, and grenades. That makes sense guys.

That should cause alarm to any sane person. He wasn't going to have fun with it, he was going to kill people, in any end, that's what it would have been for. Face it. That's what his arsenal was for. Period. Killing people. And, he got it illegally. He's going to jail for an extremely long time. End of conversation.

[Bullnettles]

I was being facetious about the trees, calm down man. As for the killing of people, that's what guns were invented for, it's a fact. Which people is a good question here.

[sturmgewehr667]

Umm. How would you feel if your next door neighbor had 60 grenades, 6 blocks of C4, and 37 machine guns


i would feel happy knowing that my neighbor exorcising his rights, legal or not. he is bold enough not to comply with the oppressive laws made by the anti gun fascists.

[Halo is for Kids]

Wonder what they didn't find???

[Wyo_F-A]

in Washington State. Machine guns are a no-no even with a stamp.
Sliencers with papers are OK as long as you don't put them on a gun.

this leaves me scratching my head.

"yes you may own that wonderful piece of equipment, but don't use it for its intended purpose"

i can definitely say that my neighbors in the county prefer my late night range sessions 'muffled'.

[SamG.]

Quote:
Umm. How would you feel if your next door neighbor had 60 grenades, 6 blocks of C4, and 37 machine guns


i would feel happy knowing that my neighbor exorcising his rights, legal or not. he is bold enough not to comply with the oppressive laws made by the anti gun fascists.


You people are on the 3rd level of stupidity (there are only three levels):rolleyes:

[Wyo_F-A]

i would feel happy knowing that my neighbor exorcising his rights, legal or not. he is bold enough not to comply with the oppressive laws made by the anti gun fascists.

+1 :D

[wyocarp]

I too wish I could find a storage unit like that to purchase. I'm so fed up with this country.

[SamG.]

you people make me laugh:neener:

[Titan6]

That should cause alarm to any sane person. He wasn't going to have fun with it, he was going to kill people, in any end, that's what it would have been for. Face it. That's what his arsenal was for. Period. Killing people.

Yeah umm we haven't had any hardcore antis here for a while.

Welcome aboard!

[divemedic]

I don't understand why anyone would be any more nervous about a neighbor owning 100 machine guns then they would about a neighbor owning a single crossbow or a sword. Heck, even a hammer.

How many ties do we tell the anti's that guns don't kill, people kill. Then we go and prove it by being just as hoplophobic. If a person wants to kill you, you are just as dead if shot by his daddy's break open 20 gauge as you are if he shoots you with a bazooka.

[Prince Yamato]

Umm. How would you feel if your next door neighbor had 60 grenades, 6 blocks of C4, and 37 machine guns

I'll chime up against the majority here. I have no problem with machineguns, they should be perfectly legal for any law abiding person to possess, but the destructive devices area whole 'nother ballgame. I wouldn't want some yahoo storing explosives in a shed by where I live.

Another thing to realize, is that the pacific northwest has a high concentration of white supremacists, so it would be reasonable to assume that this man could possibly be affiliated and up to no good.

[Titan6]

Another thing to realize, is that the pacific northwest has a high concentration of white supremacists, so it would be reasonable to assume that this man could possibly be affiliated and up to no good.

But of course.

I always make the jump from illegal guns to White Supremacist whenever I watch Cops on TV. It is only natural. Anyone else want to jump in and help out the cause a little more? Anymore help like the last few comments and I might just turn my guns over to the police tonight.

[Gungnir]

Interesting story, and near me too.

My thoughts, it's a news report. I'll delay my judgment on whether what he did or had was illegal, until after he is tried and acquitted or found guilty. I thought innocent until proven guilty was a cornerstone of justice, not innocent until sensationalized by the media.

Of course if they might invoke the Patriot act, which would suspend my judgment on this situation indefinitely.

I'm sure that we'll find out what happened in the coming weeks, speculation on these things is never helpful.

[SamG.]

Quote:
Umm. How would you feel if your next door neighbor had 60 grenades, 6 blocks of C4, and 37 machine guns


i would feel happy knowing that my neighbor exorcising his rights, legal or not. he is bold enough not to comply with the oppressive laws made by the anti gun fascists.


Having high explosives is not your "right" There is nothing in the constitution having anything to do with C4. It protects your right to keep and bear arms, not explosives. You people are straight from survivalistboards....

[Eightball]

This guy either stole illegal "assault" guns and "smokeless reloading powder" from the "only government-approved owners" (you assume), or he bought ones that were stolen in an illegal purchase (you assume). This is not someone who has been taken advantage of by law enforcement. This is a bad guy. I don't care how old he is.

He didn't have unbanned hunting weapons. He had "assault" guns, hi-capacity magazines and reloading supplies. I don't think they should be illegal either, but they are.

Tell me why you think I should sympathize with a criminal.Y'know, change just a couple of the nouns in your assessment, and that's "the next stage" for the Anti's to get us to think. You'll hem and haw, but this is ultimately what's happening. I just altered your statement to a close approximation of what civilians own now, with what a presumable Fudd would say after, oh, say, an AWB II was instituted. It's not an impossible logical step.

How would you feel if your next door neighbor had 60 pounds of reloading supplies, 6 blocks of "explode-on-contact primers", and 37 (previously non-illegal) firearms? The (previously legal) firearms were a little alarming to me, but WHO IN THE WORLD needs reloading supplies of that design? Come on! What the heck would you do with that? I think we need to start trusting our big brother and accept that he could have been a terrorist.Once again....change a couple nouns, and it's potentially scary what people can think in a few years.

Okay, yeah he was going to do something completely legal, but in a really bizarre way. Except that he had conceal-carry firearms. That makes sense guys.

That should cause alarm to any sane person. He wasn't going to have fun with it, he was going to kill people, in any end, that's what it would have been for. Face it. That's what his firearm was for. Period. Killing people. And, he got it [PRESUMABLY] illegally. He's going to jail for an extremely long time. End of conversation.Change a word or two here and there.......and presto!

Frankly, if the guy next door to me had a bunch of MGs and DDs, I'd be jealous. If they were illegal, maybe I'd wonder, but I wouldn't instantly ASSUME they were illegal; and if they were legal, then that's all there is to it.

I'm not "for" the guy, or "for" the ATF. It's just kind of frightening how many "pro" gun people's statements, if you change the firearm/item in question to a closely-equivalent item which is currently legal, is precisely what Fudds would say about an AWB, or the next level down from Fudds would say when "Sniper rifles" are banned, or......or.....etc.

It's also really not cool when we instantly assume the guy's guilty (okay, well maybe in his state, yes, but let's think on a broader level here). Whatever happened to that whole "innocent until proven" thing?

And I'm not trying to pick on people specifically; this is more of a "devil's advocate" thing to make a point.

[SamG.]

1/Eighth of a ball ...amazing what you can do when you change someones words around.... :)

[Zoogster]

I personaly would not like my neighbor to have lots of explosives, and I don't want them to play loud music.
If they insist on having them though I would prefer they have stable explosives (like C4), and store them away from my residence, like in a storage facility or remote location. Exactly as this guy is alleged to have done. :neener:


Now that I think of it though, smokeless is composed of explosives. Double and triple based propellants are certainly explosives. Even black powder is an explosive.
To make your own powder or even be self reliant for ammunition would require you to be capable of making such explosives.
So I guess we need a lot more laws, or stricter edicts and interpretations to reflect what we want our neighbor to have.
Everyone should legaly be required to depend on others for creating propellants, and therefore dependent on supplies controlled by others to excercise thier 2nd Amendment rights.

Of course explosives not crossing state lines or entering into commercial use didn't use to be a concern to the ATF (though crimes commited with them were).
The Safe Explosives Act was passed by Congress in 2002 as part of the Homeland Security Act.

[cbrgator]

Oh, come on. Isn't anyone going to pipe up and say, "'Arsenal'? You call that an 'arsenal'? Sheesh; what would they say if they saw MY gun room?"?
Duke, have you ever posted pictures of your gun room? Obviously understand if you didn't but if you have I'd love to be directed there. Sounds pretty awesome based on the way you said that.

[Duke of Doubt]

I don't assume he'd criminally misuse them, but regulations exist for safe transport, storage and handling of explosives and other hazmats for good reason. Related to that is control of possession. I don't care whether you think you have a right to park a truckload of C-4 -- or fuel-air explosive mix and catalyst -- or a tanker truck of hydrogen peroxide, for that matter -- in your driveway or storage shed or not. It is hazardous, legal or not, and regulations exist for safe transport, storage and handling. Not because someone's trying to take away your God-given right to hydrogen peroxide, but because mishandling can easily cause a catastrophe which spills far beyond the bounds of your little double-wide pad.

Once you accept regulation of possession, transport, storage and handling, you must accept punishment for violations. Whether you want to call it C-4 or something else, it's less emotional and more logical to analyze the issue in terms of external hazard from hazmats rather than "gun control". The machineguns, if they really are machineguns, are another matter.

I don't want any part of a community where the crazy guy down the street with nothing better to do decides to "keep it real" by pushing the envelope of his God-given rights by parking a tanker truck of hydrogen peroxide next to my house. And I don't have to.

I really don't care too much if the guy next door has a few score machineguns, but I support some limited regulation of machineguns and their possession as opposed to repeating firearms, simply because, again, of the degree of external hazard. Once that's addressed to some extent (no system is foolproof, including the sorry mess we have now), I'll be happy to live next door to the guy.

The possible thefts are another matter.

[Zoogster]

I really don't care too much if the guy next door has a few score machineguns, but I support some limited regulation of machineguns and their possession as opposed to repeating firearms, simply because, again, of the degree of external hazard. Once that's addressed to some extent (no system is foolproof, including the sorry mess we have now), I'll be happy to live next door to the guy.


The thing is this was legal not too long ago.

There may come a time when a new AWB exists, and ammo is much more expensive, requires serialization, has to be made of expensive "green" materials, and reloading will be banned as a way of making "untracable ammunition" the type of thing only a criminal would want to be able to do. :neener:
All such laws are currently proposed each year, it is just a matter of them passing.
People will then be shocked when you talk of a time people were allowed to make untraceable ammunition, have "assault weapons like the military!!", own non "smart guns" that were so crude they merely relied on mechanical safeties, and many other new normal common sense measures the latest generation grew up with.

When some guy is then found not only making his own illegal unserialized "untraceable" ammunition (which of course would require him to make his own propellant, an explosive) and from horrible toxic inexpensive lead on top of that (no respect for our environment!), with possession of something obsolutely evil like an "assault weapon" (only suitable for battlefields and criminal actions) and everyone is certain the guy must have been a total nut job you will understand.
That is essentialy what happened with "destructive devices" (like anything over .50) in 1968.

People can remember the day when ordering what are now destructive devices through a mail order catalog was perfectly legal.
You will be able to remember a day when ammunition was affordable enough to actualy plink, and people could even make thier own! People will be convinced you are nuts if you think that was better, because clearly untraceable lead ammo was an awful thing. Guns that relied on mere mechanical safeties and did not have complex circuits, fingerprint or retinal scanners, breathalizers, and other built in features (a felony to remove or disable) that you think they were perfectly fine without.

That is of course if the added restrictions did not achieve the desired purpose of minimizing the desire to be a part of the whole oppressive system, resulting in reduction of gun support or open ownership to a level that removing the RKBA altogether can be accomplished (of course they will still pay lip service no matter the situation and insure everyone taking annual classes, paying huge fees to own a single shot or requiring steps like those of the UK still means they have the RKBA and the 2nd Amendment is in effect.)

[ConstitutionCowboy]

Having high explosives is not your "right" There is nothing in the constitution having anything to do with C4. It protects your right to keep and bear arms, not explosives. You people are straight from survivalistboards....

Explosives are effective weapons, especially C4. All weapons are arms.

Maybe you thing you are insulting us here by calling us survivalists. ANYONE who defends himself is a survivalist. ANYONE who packs a lunch and brings along a bottle of water on a trip is a survivalist. ANYONE who wears a life vest in a boat is a survivalist. ANYONE with food in their pantry and freezer is a survivalist. ANY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER who carries a gun on duty - especially on a call - does so for his defense and is a survivalist. Some of us are smarter and better equipped for the long hall than others. Some of us have read history and see the warning signs and prepare. So, it's better to prepare. Otherwise, you might perish with an errant bunch of boobs running a government - or at their hand.


Now that I think of it though, smokeless is composed of explosives. Double and triple based propellants are certainly explosives. Even black powder is an explosive.

Gun powders burn. Gun powders are amalgamated chemicals that burn(chemically bond into stable compounds) when ignited, releasing energy as they burn. Explosives are unstable compounds that decompose into other chemicals when triggered, releasing energy instantaneously.

Woody

[Logan5]

Oh, come on. Isn't anyone going to pipe up and say, "'Arsenal'? You call that an 'arsenal'? Sheesh; what would they say if they saw MY gun room?

On that note, how do you do that "This thread is useless without pictures!" thing with the smilieys? Can't believe this thread has gone this long without that popping up...

[Hoplophile]

In addition to this, I'd like to point out that high explosives are a generally poor idea for close-quarters combat. He probably didn't keep them around for home defense.

[Treo]

The concept behind the second amend ment is so clear that I am amazed that it's even open for debate here.

The founders made it clear that they wanted the citizenry to be able ( at need) to remove a seated government, with a standing army at its disposal, from power.

If that is true there is no way that they could have ever expected the RKBA to be limited to shoulder fired weapons.

Hence C-4 , properly stored, in the hands of a civilian is fine by me

I am completely cool W/ any civilian being allowed to own any weapon on the TO&E for an 11B

A well armed citizenry is the goverment's conscience. Do Obama & Co want to turn America into a worker's paradise? IDK ,but I damn sure bet you anyone who wants to will think twice as long as we're armed

[Eightball]

Now that I think of it though, smokeless is composed of explosives. Double and triple based propellants are certainly explosives. Even black powder is an explosive.Technically, smokeless powder is a propellant, and Black Powder is the explosive. Hence certain haz-mat charges for shipping from internet orders for various reloading or black powder supplies.

:D

[Zoogster]

Gun powders burn. Gun powders are amalgamated chemicals that burn(chemically bond into stable compounds) when ignited, releasing energy as they burn. Explosives are unstable compounds that decompose into other chemicals when triggered, releasing energy instantaneously.

I am aware of the difference, the actual difference is simply the rate of combustion/detonation and there is unstable and stable versions of both.
Black powder actualy does detonate and is an explosive.
Smokeless powder is made from explosives an individual has to create in order to create many smokeless propellants.
Such as nitroglycerine.
The same thing used in dynamite.

Nitroguanidine and nitroglycerine in double and triple based smokeless powders have a high detonation velocity and are clearly explosives. When combined with nitrocellulose in certain processes the detonation velocity can be slowed dramaticly while the energy released is the same, making a great high energy propellant.

However one is still making explosives to make propellant. The stuff required to propel bullets and excercise the 2nd Amendment.

On top of that primers are absolutely explosives, every single one is an explosive compound and not simply a "propellant".
Making primers is making high explosives without a doubt.
Lead styphnate, lead azide, mercury fulminate, and all the other common compounds that have been used for primers are high explosives, even in the finished product.

[TRGRHPY]

but I support some limited regulation of machineguns and their possession as opposed to repeating firearms, simply because, again, of the degree of external hazard

He is limited...he only has two arms and ten fingers.
Who are you to tell anyone what, or how much of something, they can own? Too many veterans have served, been injured, or died for our freedoms (myself included) for you tell anyone squat with regard to their freedoms.

[EHL]

It's no wonder our 2nd amendment rights keep eroding away every few years. We all placate ourselves with the recent Heller case, but the fact is, many of our members in this forum and gun owners in general hold views that accept so called "sensible gun laws". Like many members have mentioned, just alittle over 50 years ago, many of these items were legal. Now, the mere mention of civilians being in possesion of these once legal items creates gasps of shock among anti's and gun owners alike. It's sad that we (collectively as a nation) have forgotten the ultimate purpose of the 2nd amendment. It wasn't for hunting and it wasn't for defending our homes either. It was the People's check against the government. Here's what I mean by that: Our government is comprised of three branches that holds checks and balances over their counterparts so that no one branch could take control of them all. The Declaration of the Independence states "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government........But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
How can any nation ever hope the "throw off" a government that no longer serves it's people's with only government approved weapons? The founding fathers understood full well that governments historically have sought to opress their people into absolute servitude. The only way to insure that their posterity would have the means to both prevent this and even possibly abolish such a bad government, would be for it's citizens to have access to the same weapons that would be used against them by their own government's military. When our government outlawed the possesion(at least for those of us who don't have tens of thousands of dollars for pre-ban ones) of automatic weapons, explosive devices such as bazookas, grenades, etc.. we were essentially put to a huge disadvantage since we won't have access to the very same weapons our military would use against us if we ever had to rise up against a despotic government. Now with the threat of the .50 Caliber BMG,"assault weapons", and hi-cap mags being outlawed as well, we can see that we would really have no chance at all for possible success against the awesome might of a fully armed military force intent on putting down a rebellion against a despotic government or outside military force that could invade.
No doubt many of you naysayers will dismiss this argument while justifying your belief that "our military would NEVER do that". Our Founding fathers knew better than to trust a standing army. They put more trust in the militia, i.e neighborhood defenders than they did with any standing army that is meant to obey orders, period.

[RP88]

Well, he is an old guy. He is old enough to have lived in a time where alot of those weapons were still widely available. I'm betting alot of that stuff was probably crap he jacked from the 60's or 70's, or things he probably simply picked up from the good ol' days.

The only thing unsettling is how he had the explosives, and the fact that he was storing it in storage sheds. Not to sound stereotypical, but most people to me just stockpile crap or bury it on their own property. He could have had it in sheds in order to keep it away from neighbors/witnesses, and for all we know that cache of his could have been bigger and included alot more sheds. He could have been doing some arms dealing. Who knows. California is not too far away. Hopefully they'll find out and we can see where the case ends up.

[General Geoff]

Umm. How would you feel if your next door neighbor had 60 grenades, 6 blocks of C4, and 37 machine guns? The machine guns were a little alarming to me, but WHO IN THE WORLD needs high explosives of that design? Come on! What the heck would you do with that? I think we need to start trusting our big brother and accept that he could have been a terrorist.

I'd be completely fine with my neighbor having all that. As treo mentioned, I'd be jealous. :D



Just remember that the only difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter is which side you're rooting for.

[DoubleTapDrew]

Some of you act like C4 is extremely unstable and dangerous, like weeping TNT. Didn't soldiers use c4 as an improvised cooking fire in vietnam? It needs a blasting cap or detonator to touch it off. Shooting the stuff won't even do it.
I think chances are the guy was in possession of stolen, illegal goods. I'd be surprised if it wasn't. And yes, that's criminal. However I think those laws are totally wrong and unconstitutional. I'm of the impression that "arms" are what a moden soldier carries. In 1776 it was muskets and a sword. In 2009 it's an M4 with a M203 on it, grenades, and maybe a block or two of c4.
I guess 18 year olds who have never fired a gun before are to be trusted with those but not people who have been around fireams and/or explosives their entire lives because...well because the government says so.
When they change the laws (and chances are they will), you can keep talking about how somebody must be a terrorist kook because he was in possession of a 30 round magazine and only the military has access to those because they are made for killing, not hunting like (the government told you) the Constitution intended, with a bow and arrow.

[EHL]

Don't know about you, but I probably would have invested in some PVC pipes and a few shovels to "get rid of the "problem"".:evil:

[PTK]

Gun powders burn. Gun powders are amalgamated chemicals that burn(chemically bond into stable compounds) when ignited, releasing energy as they burn. Explosives are unstable compounds that decompose into other chemicals when triggered, releasing energy instantaneously.

Minor correction, gun powder (being double based smokeless primarily composed of nitrocellulose and nitroglycerin) is a high explosive, but a secondary high explosive. It needs a primary (and sometimes a booster, depending on the exact powder we're talking about) to make it detonate, which is why simple flame will make it burn as in a firearm. :)


The concept behind the second amendment is so clear that I am amazed that it's even open for debate here.

The founders made it clear that they wanted the citizenry to be able ( at need) to remove a seated government, with a standing army at its disposal, from power.

If that is true there is no way that they could have ever expected the RKBA to be limited to shoulder fired weapons.

Hence C-4 , properly stored, in the hands of a civilian is fine by me

I am completely cool W/ any civilian being allowed to own any weapon on the TO&E for an 11B

A well armed citizenry is the government's conscience. Do Obama & Co want to turn America into a worker's paradise? IDK ,but I damn sure bet you anyone who wants to will think twice as long as we're armed


Magnificent, sir. I fully and entirely agree with you.


Some of you act like C4 is extremely unstable and dangerous, like weeping TNT. Didn't soldiers use c4 as an improvised cooking fire in Vietnam? It needs a blasting cap or detonator to touch it off. Shooting the stuff won't even do it.

Ding ding ding! Except the part about trinitrotoluene, you're entirely correct; you're not thinking of TNT, you're thinking of nitroglycerin based dynamite which can "leak" or "weep" NG onto the surface of the wrapper - and NG is SENSITIVE stuff. Flame, impact, you name it! C4, however, being a plasticized explosive composed primarily of Royal Demolition Explosive (RDX, I'm sure you're familiar with the stuff) is shock and flame insensitive. TNT is fairly stable as well, being a castable secondary HE. :)

[General Geoff]

Trinitrotoluene doesn't weep, dynamite (nitroglycerin-based) does... But yeah, all the stuff this guy had, was legal just 41 years ago..

[PTK]

Trinitrotoluene doesn't weep, dynamite (nitroglycerin-based) does... But yeah, all the stuff this guy had, was legal just 41 years ago..

Another who understands energetic compounds... good! :)

Minor note: Everything he had except the post-86 MGs is legal, Federally. Certain licenses, etc., are needed, but even HEs are quite legal - heck, I know a fellow back in Ohio that had his HE User License and could order explosives through UPS!! :D

[DoubleTapDrew]

Except the part about trinitrotoluene, you're entirely correct; you're not thinking of TNT, you're thinking of nitroglycerin based dynamite which can "leak" or "weep" NG onto the surface of the wrapper
Oops, yes I was thinking of dynamite.
The media loves to exaggerate things as everyone knows. C4 is stable and 40mm grenades must be spin-armed. You could walk into that shed smoking a cigar with a belt made of bottle rockets and the neighborhood would be pefectly safe.
Maybe he was up to no good, but aside from violating unconstitutional laws there isn't evidence of anything sinister (I would like to know where the stuff came from though). He'll be hanged regardless. They don't let you off with a warning for that kind of hardware.

[.455_Hunter]

FYI.

New production C4 that has been properly stored is great- very safe to handle.

However, as the VOCs leave C4 overtime, the sensitivity RDX/plastic binder blend goes up dramatically. I would be very concerned about some Vietnam-era C4 exposed to 40 years of temperature and humidity fluctuations. :eek:

Hunter

[expvideo]

Once again....change a couple nouns, and it's potentially scary what people can think in a few years.
I know that's not high road, but there is really no other way to explain how rediculous that is. Of course all you have to do to change everything a sentence is about is just to change all of the nouns.

[Jeff White]

Since this thread has degenerated into name calling it's done. When the case goes to trial someone can open a new thread on this topic and update us. Until then, this subject is closed!